Make no mistake, we fully support efforts by Dover's newly formed Joint Adequacy Funding Committee to address a $1.9 million shortfall generated from the state's school adequacy funding formula.

What we don't support is City Councilor Karen Weston's suggestion that committee meetings not be televised in fear of revealing too much about the committee's strategy to communities that may lose funding if anything about the formula is changed.

First off, the meetings are open to the public, as required by the state's Right to Know Law.

Second is the adage that if more than one person knows something it is not a secret. How foolish can Weston be to believe simply not televising the meetings will keep some secret strategy under lock and key.

Third, Dover is not alone in the battle to garner more adequacy funding from state coffers. There are 28 school districts being short-sheeted by the state legislature's current funding freeze. This means Dover is going to have to caucus with many other communities if it is going to mount a successful legislative effort in the House and Senate. This is especially the case given that cities such as Nashua and Manchester, with much stronger legislative delegations, have been able to hold sway in Concord at the expense of Dover and other small school districts.

One would think that with all the Dover City Council has been through with Right to Know Law issues and with the current problems the Dover School Board is having with its own right-to-know controversy, Weston would have known better.

Hopefully, everyone else involved understands the importance of RSA 91: a, even if Weston does not.

***

As for the School Board's current right-to-know problems, a letter writer from Alton appears to have done the homework Superintendent Jean Briggs-Badger and School Board Chair Rocky D'Andrea should have done before all hell inauspiciously broke loose — during, of all times, budget season when credibility is of utmost importance.

In a community commentary published Wednesday, Jeffrey T. Clay tears the curtain away from efforts by both to hide behind closed doors in formulating a board policy that appears to shield the superintendent from responding to public scrutiny.

To be fair, Briggs-Badger claims the policy being developed is only designed to streamline communications. Unfortunately, trying to develop the policy behind closed doors and sealed minutes appears to put the lie to that notion.

As for the policy itself, it is gibberish to which even the most liberal grammarian would give a failing grade. But don't take our word for it; judge for yourself:

“The Superintendent may take issue with a member or members of the School Board, publicly or privately, concerning the actions, statements, or positions taken by any individual member or group of members. Once an affirmative vote of the School Board has been taken on any issue, the Superintendent is expected to carry out the change or order. Any Board member requesting information from the administration shall forward a request to the superintendent's office. If responding to the request appears to require more than 120 minutes of administrative time or if the request creates concerns over conflicts with pre-existing Board projects/requests, the Superintendent may forward the request to the School Board for approval and prioritization. All information provided to any Board member pursuant to a request for information shall be shared with the entire School Board. Any complaints/concerns regarding the Superintendent, School Board decisions/practices, or the interactions between the School Board and the City of Dover shall be directed to the Chair of the School Board”